Very happy they named this team and will be even happier if they start. This is as good as we can muster and gives a chance.
A good sign for " morale" that they want to play past niggles at this late stage.
Shame about late last year thought Potter deserved better.
This is a solid pack.
But the fact they are taking it so seriously is even better.

Magpie Magic wrote:Very happy they named this team and will be even happier if they start. This is as good as we can muster and gives a chance.
A good sign for " morale" that they want to play past niggles at this late stage.
Shame about late last year thought Potter deserved better.
This is a solid pack.
But the fact they are taking it so seriously is even better.

Yeah Potter was lucky to have seventeen fit players to choose from around this time last year, particularly in the backline, as we were playing a couple of backrowers and/or rookies in the three quarters, Moses getting his first starts as a half and of course no Teddy. The dollars injected into S&C seem to have made a big difference, yet we are further down the table.

greatodensraven wrote:Marty off the bench is a no-brainer for me. We have been able to start well but as soon as the 20 min mark hits & our starting props go off we always lose touch with the opposition. Imagine being right in a game at 20 odd minutes & then being able to bring the Kapow into proceedings to terrorise the opposition! Instead of trying to hang on for the rest of the half we could actually continue the momentum & take advantage of his aggressive go-forward. His charging runs also lift the rest of the team when he comes on.

Really can't understand JTs decision to start Marty when he brings so much for impact for us off the bench. Especially now that our starting pack (Woods, Keith, Siro, Sue & lawrence) have been at least holding their own lately.

I don't get it either, he made all his good impact for the Kiwis off the bench.

Personally I don't think he has the motor yet to start the game consistently - first 20 mins are obviously the most intense and you need guys who pace themselves, to come back fresh enough after their breather. From my POV, Marty seems to go all-out for the first twenty, but is much less effective in his second stint.

The true beauty of Woods as a consistent prop performer is that he keeps his level up all game, so the intensity and involvement of his first 20 isn't really different to his last 20.

willow wrote:Powerful bench, I like it. If we can get our completions up we should be too skilful for the Sharks.

I am not too sure, we will need to play really well to beat them which means Brooks needs to have a blinder.

I'm still waiting for that blinder of a game , His Debut vs the Dragons was great .

It depends who you talk to on this Forum, if you are Optimistic? it's because your delusional and need a reality check. If you are Pessimistic? Your accused of being a negative Nancy and to go and follow another Club.

willow wrote:Powerful bench, I like it. If we can get our completions up we should be too skilful for the Sharks.

I am not too sure, we will need to play really well to beat them which means Brooks needs to have a blinder.

I'm still waiting for that blinder of a game , His Debut vs the Dragons was great .

Well I guess he did not have a blinder!

I'm so sick of all the lame excuses some put for him , his about to complete his 2nd full Season in 1st Grade and to me he just doesn't have it . Little pieces of brilliance here and there doesn't make him a complete 1st Grader......can't even tackle and i'm not talking on Emotion either .
It's a fact as much as some night deny it.

It depends who you talk to on this Forum, if you are Optimistic? it's because your delusional and need a reality check. If you are Pessimistic? Your accused of being a negative Nancy and to go and follow another Club.